FARMERS' DIFFICULTIES.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLIV, Issue XLIV, 21 May 1924, Page 6

FARMERS' DIFFICULTIES.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —I am credited by 'Old Farmer" with seeming to adv(«.ate cutting land values back to 1914 prices. Ido not think the working dairy farmer received" a just reward for liis la'oour in 1914, and the only time I considered he reoeived a just reward for labour and capital employed was when butter-fat was two" shillings per pound and land values had not increased to any great extent and interest was reckoned at 5 per cent. Alt the same the working farmer was better off in 1914 than now, and I consider the wage-earner was better off, too. In 1914 the average wage earned was from £2 10s to £3 per week, and now, owing to rents for dwelling houses and business places being 150 per cent, higher, and funeral expenses being a long way ahead, it is much, harder to live and die decently on £4 per weeky. I think we have a long way to travel to get back to normal, and it is the working farmer who suffers most in the meantime. My experience is that if the farmer is prosperous the rest of the community is also. During the war farm products were realising good returns to the farmer, and work and riioney were plentiful. Farmers were getting a fair reward, fanning became popular and people were keen to get on the land, and so, of course, prices for land increased; the speculator hopped in, and that was the end of the good things for the man who had to farm the land at the inflated value. As the farmer was getting a good return For his produce, the cost of living rose, and the wage-earner Jiad to receive more wages, the merchant and retailer passed the increase of wages ('and mere with it) on to the consumer, so that professional men such as doctors raised their fees; lawyers also raised their charges; money-lenders raised the! rates of interest, as more money was needed, and the property owners of course charged the highest possible rent for residences and farms and business places. These people had their way of passing things on, and took full advantage. The prices for dairy produce are now falling, but freight and manufacturing oasts are still high on account of the high cost of living, and, perhaps, also the cost of high living, &o that what once used to be a good price is not sufficient to keep the farmer prosperous. The farmer is the primary producer: supply and demand are supposed to regulate the price of his pro- | duce, and therefore he cannot pass on ! the much heavier charges in the shape of rent, interest, fieight and manufacturing costs to the consumer. My contention is this, when I advocate a Fair Rent Bill, that as the working farmer c-mnot pass these charges on^ he should not be hampered in his operations by rack-rents and heaw interest charges. During the boom I was told by a man: "I only went over the farm once and I cleared £1500." Now this speculator did not improve' the farm by walking over it once. He. either bought it cheap, and "had" the vendor, or he sold it dear, and "had" the purchaser, and I cannot see why either or both should be "had" to benefit a speculator who walked over the farm once. The present nlan of charging farmers and would-be farmers the highest price possible for the land has proved a dismal failure, and should he improved upon. The welfare of this undoubtedly splendid little cpuntry demands the prosperity of the workinotanner. Thankinjr you, Mr K-litor for your usual courtesy.—l am, etc., ' GENUINE FARMER^